Joe (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa by Ms Lucy Nanun Joe, a citizen of Liberia, sponsored by her husband, Mr Ericson Joe, a permanent resident of Australia. The parties met in 2006, began living together in 2007, and had a child together in 2007. After a period of separation and other relationships by Mr Joe, they rekindled their relationship in 2015, married in 2017, and subsequently lodged the visa application in 2020. The Tribunal, constituted by Edward Howard, was asked to consider the validity of their spousal relationship for visa purposes.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms Joe met the criteria for a Subclass 309 Partner visa, specifically concerning the genuineness and commitment of her relationship with Mr Joe at the time of the application. This involved assessing whether the parties were in a genuine spousal relationship, considering various aspects including financial contributions, household arrangements, social presentation, and the nature of their commitment to each other, as outlined in regulation 1.15A of the Migration Regulations 1994. The Tribunal also had to determine the relevance of events occurring after the visa application date in assessing the relationship at the time of application.

The Tribunal reasoned that while there had been a period of distance and difficulties in the relationship, the evidence, including financial contributions, the birth of a child, their marriage, and their representation of themselves as a married couple, indicated a genuine spousal relationship. The Tribunal applied the principles that evidence of events after the visa application date could be relevant if it logically assisted in determining the existence of facts relevant to the issue at the time of application. Given the findings regarding the relationship, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration by the Minister, directing that the visa applicant met certain criteria for the Subclass 309 visa.